Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Not G.T.L. Rev, but I'm currently a district court clerk in a competitive district.

In the most competitive districts (S.D.N.Y., D.D.C., etc.), without a personal recommendation from a professor who has a close connection with a judge, I would say it will be difficult to get an interview. You should apply broadly. To the extent you target your search, however, my advice would be to focus on judges near your school and judges who your professors know personally and are willing to make calls on your behalf.

You should also see if the judge you interned for would be willing to either write a recommendation or make calls on your behalf, but my understanding is a lot of judges are unwilling to do so for interns with whom they may not have closely supervised.

Thanks for the response, I appreciate it. That doesn't come as a shock to me after seeing how many qualified applicants the USDC clerks were reviewing when I interned there. What about state supreme? Would that be doable?

What are the advantages or clerking at state supreme vis a vis the federal level?

I've worked in two major markets -- one big non-NY market, one mid-sized secondary market. In the big market, it seemed like a USDC clerkship was superior across the board (MAYBE some firms would have preferred a in-state SSC to a far away flyover USDC, but even then I have my doubts). In the secondary market, the in state SSC clerkship is probably on par with the local USDC clerkship and preferable to all other USDC clerkships (again, there might be a SDNY/DDC exception at some firms, but I doubt it). I think it probably has to do with the fact that the local law schools produce a lot more SSC clerks than AIII clerks, so firms are more cognizant of the credential.

So, I guess I'd say this: A SSC will probably carry some cache in most markets, provided that it is an in state SSC. How that cache compares to a USDC will probably depend on whether the USDC is a local one or a "prestigious" one, and what particular market. I think a good general rule is that the bigger the market the more firms would prefer a USDC, but there could be outliers.

I sort of assumed that USDC was virtually across the board a better option than SSC. I was wondering what advantages there were in general to SSC, not comparatively speaking, so maybe I used the wrong wording in my earlier post. But I think you touched on that, too.

I sort of assumed that USDC was virtually across the board a better option than SSC.

Practically speaking, this is certainly true for DC, LA and SF, because there really aren't any in state SSC clerks in those markets. It is also almost certainly true for NYC, because the practice is a lot more national and there are a lot more former USDC clerks there than NY COA clerks (though the NY COA may be one of the "exceptional" SSCs that carries AIII-level cache). It is also true for Chicago, for similar reasons. I don't know about Boston; the Mass SJC is very highly respected, and the market is less big (and a little less national) than NY or Chicago, so it's possible that the prestige level is different.

But if you move to the secondary markets -- say Texas or Atlanta or Minneapolis -- I think a lot of places put the in state SSC clerks on the same level as USDC clerks, at least non-local ones.